Journal of Positive School Psychology http://journalppw.

com
2022, Vol. 6, No. 6, 6134 – 6148

Consumer Behavior with Single-Use Plastic Bags in a

Government Campaign

1Dr. Nak Gulid, 2Dr. Supinya Yansomboon

1
Associate Professor Faculty of Business Administration for Society, Srinakharinwirot University
2
Lecturer Faculty of Business Administration for Society, Srinakharinwirot University

Abstract
The aims of this research are to a) study the impact of attitude, subjective norm, and perceived
behavioral control on consumer intention to reduce the use of plastic bags, and b) examine the
moderating effect of gender on the formulated relationships. We conducted a survey of four hundred
Bangkok residents. The structural equation model (SEM) is employed to test the hypotheses in this
study. The result showed that perceived behavioral control had the highest impact on consumer
intention and behavior, followed by consumer attitude and subjective norm. Gender had a moderating
effect on the hypothesized relationships. Attitude and perceived behavioral control had a stronger
impact on intention to reduce the plastic bags for female than male groups. Moreover, intention had a
stronger impact on consumer behavior concerning single-use plastic bags for female than male
groups.

Keywords: Attitude, Subjective norm, Perceived behavioral control, Intention, Behavior, Single-use
plastic bags, Government campaign.

Introduction the Pollution Control Department, Ministry of

Single-use plastic bags are very popular for
shopping and carrying purchased products all
over the world since the 1980s (Thomas et al.,
2019). In Asia, especially in China, the
government issued a ban to prohibit stores from
giving free plastic bags since June 1, 2008. As
a result, the consumption of plastic bags
declined from over 40 billion and preserved
about 1.6 million tons of petroleum
(Worldwatch Institute, 2013). Moreover, in
Malaysia, the Ministry of Domestic Trade,
Cooperative and Consumerism (MDTCC)
launched “the No Plastic Bag Campaign Day”
in January 2011 with the aim to reduce plastic
bag consumption and enhance pro-
environmental behavior (Zen et al., 2013). This
campaign applied only to supermarkets, retail
stores, and shopping malls at the end-user level.
In Thailand, a research institute estimated that
plastic products will reach 2.44 million tons in
2022 (Chokdamrongsuk, 2018). Furthermore,
Natural Resources and Environment, Thailand
reported that the consumption of plastic bags
reached 45 billion per year. There are 3 main
sources of plastic bags: a) local municipal
markets (40% or 18 billion plastic bags),
followed by b) grocery stores (30% or 13.5
billion plastic bags), and c) department stores,
shopping centers, supermarkets (30%)
(Damrongthai, 2019). If the Thai consumers are
not aware and continue to use plastic bags, it
would lead to plastic waste and a significant
environmental problem. Hence, the Thai
Retailers Association launched a campaign
concerning toxic elements from plastic waste
and environmental hazards. It created the
“discount, reduce, get it” campaign starting
from December 4, 2018 to August 31, 2019 and
several large retail chains such as Tesco Lotus
(Lotus’s) and Lawson began to initiate
marketing campaigns asking consumers to
reduce single-use plastic bags (Thai Retailers
Association, 2019).
6135
Under this project, supermarkets and
convenience stores were the leaders in
opposing single-use plastic bags. The Thai
government and the private sector cooperated
to encourage consumer participation in
reducing plastic bags to support positive
environmental behavior and reduce the waste
problem. In Bangkok, after the campaign,
plastic waste decreased from 10,500 tons per
year to 9,370 tons per year or 11 percent
reduction of plastic waste (Simachaya, 2021).
However, the COVID-19 pandemic became
widespread all over the world including
Thailand. The campaign was slowed a little by
this disease. Thai people stayed at home and
avoided shopping in supermarkets or used cloth
bags to carry groceries. Food delivery service
grew along with online shopping in Thailand,
especially in Bangkok due to the advances of
technology and travel difficulties. Food
delivery produced at least 5 pieces of plastic
waste per food order (packaging and
equipment). Plastic waste comprises
approximately 20 percent of total waste in
Bangkok. Hence, the amount of such waste in
Bangkok increased from 2,120 tons per day in
2019 to 3,440 tons per day in 2020, an increase
of more than 60 percent (Simachaya, 2021).
The reason is that the ban did not effect on the
reduction of plastic bags at restaurants for
takeaway or single-use boxes same as China
(Upton, 2013; Ertz et al., 2017). This became a
big challenge for Thai government.
The previous studies such as Holdershaw and
Gendall (2011), David and Thiele (2017), Haj-
Salem and Al-Hawari (2021), and Tano el al.
(2021) identified the psychological factors as
the key motivation to influence consumer
behavior in choosing or using green products or
products which have environmental concerns.
This study employed the theory of planned
behavior by Ajzen (1985) to examine the
impacts of attitude, subjective norms, perceived
behavior control on consumer intention and
behavior to reduce the use of plastic bags.
Figure 1 shows the conceptual model of the
current study. In theory of planned behavior,
attitudes, subjective norms, and perceived
behavioral control have a strong positive
impact on intention to refrain from using
single-use plastic bags (Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen and
Fishbein, 2000; Han et al., 2010). Several
scholars such as Arslan et al., 2012; Wu and
Mweemba, 2010; Sudarmadi et al., 2001; and
Journal of Positive School Psychology
Ari and Yilmaz, 2017 identified the effect that
attitude of people’s behavior impacts their
intention which, in turn, influences actual
behavior. Attitudes refer to favorable or
unfavorable individual perception or evaluation
of behavior (Ajzen, 1985, 2011). Subjective
norms depend on the expectation of others
(such as friends, relatives, and neighbors) and
the motivation to comply with their norms and
values concerning individual behavior, along
with the willingness of each person to fulfill
others’ expectations (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1970;
Fishbein and Ajzen, 1975). Perceived
behavioral control is a person’s perception of
the ease or difficulty to perform such the
particular behavior of interest that impacts
behavioral intention and actual behavior
(Ohtomo and Ohnuma, 2014; Muralidharan and
Sheehan, 2016).
The existing studies tended to focus on only
consumer intention instead of the actual
behavior (Ari and Yilmaz, 2017; Ertz et al.,
2017). Some studies (e.g., Armitage and
Conner, 2001; Muralidharan and Sheehan,
2016; Ertz et al., 2017) looked into the
relationships between consumer intention and
the actual behavior but the results are
contradictory. For example, the psychological
factors may influence consumer intention to
use green products but they are not necessary
lead to actual behaviors (Ertz et al., 2017).
Hence, this study fills up this gap by focusing
on the intention as well as the actual behavior.
Male and Female consumers think differently
and may also have different pro-environmental
behaviors. Only few examined the impact of
gender on pro-environmental behavior
(Thomas et al., 2019). Gender is related to self-
construal. It can explain one’s self as either
independent (male) and interdependent
(female) from others (Cross and Madson, 1997;
Peake et al., 2017). In the previous studies, it
concluded that gender is different in
motivations for contributing the community
(DeHart-Davis et al., 2006; Mesch et al., 2011).
Homonoff (2013) also found that young men
are less likely to support the reusable bags
campaign. Therefore, the current study
employed theory of planned behavior to
examine the influence of consumers’ attitude,
subjective norms, and perceived behavioral
control on the intention to reduce the plastic
bag usage which consequently influence
Nak Gulid
consumers’ actual behavior. The moderating
role of gender will also be examined.
LITERATURE REVIEW
Theory of reasoned action (TRA)
Several scholars in marketing areas have
employed the theory of reasoned action (TRA)
to analyze consumer behavior in various
contexts, especially on environmental
sensitivity, sustainability, recycling behavior,
or pro-environmental behavior (Tonglet et al.
2004 a,b; Knussen et al. 2004, Ohtoma and
Ohnuma 2014; Huang et al. 2014; Ari and
Yilmaz, 2017; Paul et al., 2016; Liu et al.,
2017; Paswan et al., 2017; Asnawi, et al.,
2020). TRA is relevant to explain
psychological/cognitive processes to
understand consumers’ contextual decision-
making (Han and Kim, 2010; Asnawi, et al.,
2020). To change consumer behavior, it is
important to educate people by employing a
government campaign to enhance awareness of
the impact of plastic bags. Moreover, the
campaign is supported by supermarkets and
retail outlets (Zen et al., 2013). The launch of
“Everyday Say No to Plastic Bags” by the
Department of Environmental Quality
Promotion in Thailand was started mainly in
supermarkets and convenience stores; however,
it was rarely seen in local municipal markets or
grocery stores, which produce about 70 percent
of plastic waste. Hence, a measure of consumer
attitudes and behavior is important in this
study. Several studies on plastic bag projects
were not only related to declining use of plastic
bags (Dikgang and Visser, 2012), but also
concerned with anti-consumption and attitudes
(Sharp et al., 2010). A behavior change process
requires specific attitudes (learning and
suggested behavior as positive) along with
knowledge of the subject matter (Wright and
Klyn, 1987; Hines et al., 2010, Zen et al.,
2013). Attitude is related to positive or negative
assessment of specified behavior and affects
behavioral intention (Ajzen and Fishbein, 1980;
Muralidharan and Sheehan, 2016). Tonglet et
al. (2004) states that attitudes toward recycling
along with related behavior showed the strong
impact on intention. Attitude and subjective
norms rely on normative beliefs and motivation
to comply which enhances behavioral intention
and subsequently behavior. Normative beliefs
6136
are individual perceptions of social normative
pressures. Subjective norms are an individual’s
perception of specified behavior which is
affected by others (such as friends, peers,
spouse, relatives, etc.). Norms led to behavior
intention and people's desire to act as others do
(Amjad and Wood, 2009; Muralidharan and
Sheehan, 2016).
Theory of planned behavior (TPB)
The theory of planned behavior (TPB) states
that intention is influenced by three (instead of
two) factors: attitude, subjective norms, and
perceived behavioral control. TPB extends
from the theory of reasoned behavior to include
non-volitional behavior to predict behavioral
intention and actual behavior. Perceived
behavioral control is defined as “a person’s
beliefs on the difficulty of performing the
behavior of interest that predicts behavioral
intention and actual behavior” (Muralidharan
and Sheehan, 2016, p.204). This relationship
was confirmed in several studies on green
products and services (Zen et al. 2013;
Muralidharan and Sheehan, 2016). For
example, Armitage and Conner (2001)
conclude that perceived behavioral control
shows a strong impact on intention and actual
behavior, whereas subjective norms show the
weakest impact on these variables. Han et al.
(2010) state that attitudes, subjective norms,
and perceived behavioral control positively
influence intentions to choose green hotels. For
the actual behavior, Bandura (1980) states that
human behavior is strongly affected by
confidence in the ability to perform a behavior,
which implies that perceived behavioral control
is strongly influenced by actual behavior. This
statement is confirmed by Armitage and
Conner (2001). Furthermore, intention and
perceived behavioral control are two variables
to measure actual behavior (Cheung et al.,
1999; Abraham and Sheeran, 2003; Ohtomo
and Ohnuma, 2014; Muralidharan and Sheehan,
2016; Ari and Yilmaz, 2017). Therefore, we
hypothesized that:
H1A: Attitudes have a direct impact on
intention to reduce single-use plastic bags.
H1B: Subjective norms have a direct impact on
intention to reduce single-use plastic bags.
6137
H1C: Perceived behavioral control has a direct
impact on intention to reduce single-use plastic
bags.
H2A: Perceived behavioral control has a direct
influence on behavior to reduce single-use
plastic bags.
H2B: Intention to reduce single-use plastic
bags have a direct influence on behavior to
reduce single-use plastic bags.
The moderating role of gender
Cross and Madson (1997) stated that self-
construal is a good proxy for gender difference
in motivation and behavior. Based on self-
construal concept (Langford and MacKinon,
2000; Beardsworth et al., 2002; Ares and
Gambaro, 2007; Chen et al., 2014; Shin et al.,
2020; and Aftab et al., 2021), men tend to be
more independent whereas women tend to be
more interdependent. Women, comparing to
men, are more likely to put more value on
closed relationships with friends and family.
On the other hand, male consumers are more
independent, which led to unique and
individual traits (Madson and Trafimow, 2001;
Peake et al., 2017). Several studies concluded
that interdependent self-construals are related
to a strong determinant to pursue their goals by
themselves rather than relying on relationships.
Moreover, independent self-construals pursue
Attitudes H1A
Intention to reduce Single-
Subjective Norms H1B
Perceived H1C
Behavioral Control
H3A H3B H3D H3C
Male/Female
Figure 1: Conceptual Framework of the Study
Journal of Positive School Psychology
their goals based on personal reasons such as
their own interests (Gore and Cross, 2006;
Gore et al., 2009; van Horen et al., 2008; Peake
et al., 2017). Eagly and Crowley (1986)
concluded that women are more sympathy and
compassion, especially on charity or public
service participation, whereas men are more
money-oriented than women (Gore et al.,
2009). Each self-construal has different
respond on environmental perception and
behavior. Based on these reasons, gender or
their self-construal may have an impact on the
relationship of attitude, subjective norm,
perceived behavioral control and the intention
along with behavior concerning single-use
plastic bags. Hence, we hypothesize:
H3A: Gender moderates the impact of attitudes
on intention to reduce single-use plastic bags.
H3B: Gender moderates the impact of
subjective norms on intention to reduce single-
use plastic bags.
H3C: Gender moderates the impact of
perceived behavioral control on intention to
reduce single-use plastic bags.
H3D: Gender moderates the impact of
perceived behavioral control on behavior to
reduce single-use plastic bags.
H3E: Gender moderates the impact of intention
on behavior to reduce single-use plastic bags.
Behavior to reduce the
Use Plastic Bags
H2B
Single-Use Plastic Bags
H2A
H3E
Nak Gulid 6138

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY Measurements

Sample and data collection The TPB model was employed in this study to
measure the direct effect of attitude, subjective
We employed a survey method to investigate norms, and perceived behavioral control on
intention and behavior to reduce consumer use intention. Furthermore, we measured the
of single-use plastic bags in Bangkok. The data impact of perceived behavioral control and
was collected during the third quarter of 2020, intention on behavior to reduce single-use
which coincides with two important events in plastic bags. The questionnaire was derived
Thailand. The first was the government from several researchers (including Jayaraman
campaign to reduce single-use plastic bags et al., 2011; Ohtomo and Ohnuma, 2014;
(beginning January 1, 2020). This was followed Sidharth and Kim, 2016; Ari and Yilmaz,
by the Covid-19 pandemic after the first round 2017). All constructs were measured by using
(March through May, 2020). Data collection the five-point Likert scale ranging from
was conducted in Bangkok. To valid the survey “Strongly Agree = 5” to “Strongly Disagree =
results, we conducted an interview with 1” (Likert, 1932). Cronbach’s alpha of attitude,
shoppers at department stores, subjective norms, perceived behavioral control,
super/hypermarkets and convenience stores. A intention, and behavior to reduce single-use
total of 400 questionnaires was collected. The plastic bags were equal to .933, .770, .750,
respondents were females (78.5%), 15-24 years .870, .761, respectively. All measures were
old (33.5%), single (74.2%), with Bachelor’s greater than 0.70, which was beyond the cut-off
degrees ((67.5%), employed in the private value (Hair et al., 2006). A binary question was
sector (40.3%), with monthly incomes lower employed to measure the moderator:
than THB10,000 (less than USD330, 21.8%), male/female. This question requested
and refusing to accept plastic bags when respondents to select gender either male or
shopping (30.8%) are the dominant respondents female.
in this study.
Table 1 identifies the result of reliability and
validity of the constructs as follows:
Table 1: Measurement Model
Average
Composite
Std. Cronbach variance
Construct reliability
loading ’s alpha extracted
(CR)
(AVE)
Attitude towards single-use plastic bags (AT) .933 .903 .65
AT1: Single-use plastic bags leads to environmental
.81
problem
AT2: Single-use plastic bags harm to living animal in
.72
the planet
AT3: Single-use plastic bags create toxic waste .82
AT4: Single-use plastic bags enhance cancer .86
AT5: Single-use plastic bags create global warming .82
Subjective norms on single-use plastic bags (SN) .770 .834 .56
SN1: If my neighbors reduce to use single-use plastic
bags, I am willing to reduce the use of single-use .77
plastic bags
SN2: If my role model reduces to use single-use plastic
bags, I am willing to reduce the use of single-use .81
plastic bags
SN3: My family is the important motive for me to
.67
reduce the use of single-use plastic bags
SN4: When the majority of people refuse to use single-
.73
use plastic bags, I am willing to follow
Perceived behavioral control (PBC) .750 .787 .65
PBC1: Government should enforce the policy to reduce
.76
single-use plastic bags
PBC2: Department stores, supermarkets, and .85
6139 Journal of Positive School Psychology

Table 1: Measurement Model

Average
Composite
Std. Cronbach variance
Construct reliability
loading ’s alpha extracted
(CR)
(AVE)
convenient stores should issue the rule in opposing
single-use plastic bags
Intention to reduce the use of single-use plastic bags
.870 .869 .63
(I)
I1: I intend to reduce the use of single-use plastic bags .82
I2: I plan to use cloth bags instead of plastic bags .81
I3: I totally support the reduction of single-use plastic
.74
bags
I4: I reduce the use of single-use plastic bags due to
.79
government policy
Behavior concerning single-use plastic bags (B) .761 .819 .60
B1: According to government campaign, I reduce the
.86
use of plastic bags
B2: I prefer to buy cloth bags if I forget my own cloth
.60
bags
B3: I promptly reply to the government campaign on
.85
reduction of single-use plastic bags
Table 1 shows that all factor loadings were et al., 2006). In this study, the sample size is
above the acceptable values of 0.4 (ranging 400 respondents, which exceeds the critical
from 0.60 to 0.86, Anderson and Gerbing, level. It is also acceptable for the analysis of
1988). The composite reliability and average SEM.
variance extracted of all constructs exceeds the
threshold of 0.7 and 0.5, which identifies the The rule of thumb for acceptable model fit was
strong internal reliability and convergent assessed with the comparative fit index (CFI),
validity (Fornell and Larcker, 1981). the Tucker-Lewis index (TLI), the root mean
squared error of approximation (RMSEA), and
the goodness-of-fit index (GFI). The GFI, CFI,
TLI values exceeded .90 and .95 (Hu &
Findings Bentler, 1995; Hair et al., 2006). In addition,
Structural equation modeling (SEM) was the RMSEA value range (from .05 to .08) is
employed in this study to examine the acceptable (Hair et al., 2006). The theoretical
conceptual model. Several scholars suggested model consisting of five variables is illustrated
that the sample size of 200 is recommended to in Figure 2. The summary of two hypotheses
be the critical sample size to test a model (Hair test results is shown in Table 2.

Figure 2: Structural Equation Model on Behavior to Reduce Single-Use Plastic Bag

AT
.227***

.15* .137*
IR
SB .469*** BR
.603***

PCB
Nak Gulid 6140

Table 2: Summary: Results of Hypotheses Testing

Standardized
H From To t-values Sig.
estimate
Intention to Reduce
H1A Attitude (AT) .227 3.669 ***
Plastic Bags (IR)
Intention to Reduce
H1B Subjective norm (SB) .150 2.035 *
Plastic Bags (IR)
Perceived Behavioral Control Intention to Reduce
H1C .469 6.020 ***
(PBC) Plastic Bags (IR)
Perceived Behavioral Control Behavior to Reduce
H2A .603 7.109 ***
(PBC) Plastic Bags (BR)
Intention to Reduce Plastic Bags Behavior to Reduce
H2B .137 1.796 *
(IR) Plastic Bags (BR)
Squared Multiple Correlations SMC Values
Intention to Reduce Plastic Bags 0.517
Behavior to Reduce Plastic Bags 0.493
Model Goodness-of-fit Statistics
Chi-Square = 280.576 X2/df = 2.281 RMR = 0.044, SRMR = 0.0474
Degree of Freedom = 123 GFI = 0.929 RMSEA = 0.057
p-values = .000 AGFI = 0.902 CFI = 0.961, TLI = 0.955
Note: Significance for t-values at one-tailed for .05 level (*) = 1.65; for .01 level (**) = 2.33; for .001
level (***) = 3.09 (Malhotra, 2004).
The results of hypotheses testing are performed equal to .603 and .137 with statistical
in terms of the standardized parameter significance at the .001 and .05 levels,
estimates and the t-values. All of the respectively. This finding supports the notion
hypotheses are statistically significant in the that perceived control behavior has the
hypothesized direction as expected. strongest direct impact on actual behavior,
which is consistent with findings from
On the first hypothesis (H1A, H1B, H1C), the Armitage and Conner (2001) and
results indicate that attitude, perceived behavior Muraliddharan and Sheehan (2016). However,
control, and subjective norm have a direct in several previous studies such as Holdershaw
positive impact on intention to reduce single- and Gendall (2011), Muraliddharan and
use plastic bags, where the standardized Sheehan, 2016, Ari and Yilmaz (2017)
estimates are equal to .227, .469, and .150 with indicated that intention was the main predictor
statistical significance at the .001 and .05 of actual behavior on the reduction to use
levels, respectively. The results are consistent plastic bags along with blood donation, which
with Ajzen, 1991; Ajzen and Fishbein, 2000; is contradict with this finding. The reason is
Han et al., 2010; Muraliddharan and Sheehan, that the data in this study is collected during
2016; Ertz et al., 2017. Hence, hypotheses COVID-19 pandemic and respondents in
H1A, H1B, and H1C are supported by the data. Bangkok increased the amount of using
In this study, perceived behavioral control has facemask and food delivery service, which
the strongest positive direct impact on intention enhanced the amount of plastic waste by 60%
to reduce single-use plastic bags, followed by (Simachaya, 2021). Respondents have the high
attitude and subjective norms, which support awareness and intention on refraining single-
the findings of Bandura (1980), Armitage and use plastic bags; however, the situation of
Conner (2001), Holdershaw and Gendall COVID-19 pandemic is inconsistent with the
(2011), Ullah et al. (2021) that perceived government campaign. Hence, perceived
behavioral control is strongly influenced by behavioral control has a stronger impact on
actual behavior. behavior because respondents’ perception to
On testing the second hypothesis (H2A, H2B), perform the actual behavior on the reduction of
the result showed that perceived behavioral single-use plastic bags is inconsistent with the
control and intention to reduce single-use real situation, especially on pandemic.
plastic bags have a direct positive influence on In conclusion, the results support the theory of
actual behavior to reduce single-use plastic planned behavior and are consistent with
bags, where the standardized estimates are several previous studies on green products and
6141
services and environmental concern (Zen et al.
2013; Muralitharan and Sheehan, 2016; Ertz et
al., 2017).
In addition, this study investigated the predictor
variables (attitude, subjective norm, and
Table 3: Indirect and Direct Effects
Predictor IR
Variables Total Direct Indirect
AT .227 .227
SN .150 .150
PBC .469 .469
IR
The results in Table 3 are explained as follows:
Intention to reduce single-use plastic bags: the
model shows 52% of the variance in intention
to reduce single-use plastic bags. Its most
important predictor variable is perceived
behavior control (β = .469), which has a
significant positive direct impact on intention
to reduce single-use plastic bags, followed by
attitude (β = .227) and subjective norm (β =
.150), respectively.
Behavior to reduce single-use plastic bags: the
model presents 49% of the variance in behavior
to reduce single-use plastic bags. Its most
important predictor variable is perceived
behavior control (β = .603) and intention to
reduce single-use plastic bags (β = .137). The
variables have a significant positive direct and
indirect impact on behavior to reduce single-
use plastic bags. Attitude and subjective norms
have only an indirect impact on behavior to
reduce single-use plastic bags: β = .031 and
.021, respectively.
Moderating Tests
Gender is a moderating variable in this study.
To examine the moderating, a multi-group path
analysis is suggested (Bagozzi and Yi, 1989).
This analysis increases the simultaneous
estimation of all hypothesized relationship
across groups. In addition, the differences
between groups in terms of male and female
are determined. Split-group analysis method is
employed to evaluate these differences
(Osterhus, 1997; Gulid, 2007). 400
Bangkokians is divided into two groups. The
number of male respondents is equal to 86
(21.5%), whereas the number of female
respondents is equal to 314 (78.5%).
The five relationships of male and female are
treated to be constrained across samples. For
Journal of Positive School Psychology
perceived behavior control) to explain a
mediating variable (intention) and a dependent
variable (behavior to reduce the single-use
plastic bags). The results are shown in Table 3.
BR
Total Direct Indirect
- .031 - .031
- .021 - .021
- .667 .603 .064
.253 .137 .110
male/female groups, the chi-square on the
unconstrained model is equal to 464.822 and
the degree of freedom is 240 (p < .000),
whereas the chi-square value of the constrained
model with the five relationships is equal to
480.624 and the degree of freedom is equal to
245 (p < .000). The difference of the chi-square
value on these two models is 15.802 (∆χ2 5 =
15.802). The critical value of chi-square table
with alpha at 0.05 and 0.01 level at the degree
of freedom of 5 is 11.070, 15.086, respectively.
Therefore, the difference of chi-square value of
the tested models is higher than the chi-square
value from the table, which implies that the
difference is statistically significant at 0.01
level. The results support that gender has a
moderating effect on the hypothesized
relationships. The result of moderating effects
of gender is shown in Table 4.
Table 4: Moderating Tests of Male/Female
Group
Male/Female Group
Constrained Model χ2 240 = 464.802
Unconstrained Model χ2 245 = 480.624
The Difference ∆χ2 5 = 15.802**
Note: * The critical value of chi-square table at
the degree of freedom of 5 is equal to 11.070,
15.086 at .05 and 0.01 levels, respectively.
The unstandardized parameter estimates of
male/female groups is shown in Table 5.
Nak Gulid
Table 5: The Hypotheses Testing on the Moderating Effects of Male/Female
From
Intention to Reduce
H3A Attitude (AT)
Plastic Bags (IR)
Subjective norm Intention to Reduce
H3B
(SB) Plastic Bags (IR)
Perceived
Intention to Reduce
H3C Behavioral
Plastic Bags (IR)
Control (PCB)
Perceived
Behavior to Reduce
H3D Behavioral
Plastic Bags (BR)
Control (PCB)
Intention to
Behavior to Reduce
H3E Reduce Plastic
Plastic Bags (BR)
Bags (IR)
Model Goodness-of-fit Statistics
Chi-Square = 464.822 X2/df = 1.937 RMR = 0.080
Degree of Freedom = 240 GFI = 0.892 RMSEA = 0.049
p-values = .000 AGFI = 0.845 CFI = 0.946
Note: Significance for t-values at one-tailed for .05 level (*) = 1.65; for .01 level (**) = 2.33; for .001
level (***) = 3.09 (Malhotra, 2004).
By comparing across groups, unstandardized
parameter estimates of male/female construct is
recommended. The reason is that indicators
may have different variances, measurement
error terms, and disturbance terms (Ping, 1995).
The result shows that all five posited
relationships of five hypothesized relationships
have the positive relationship at statistically
significant levels of 0.05 and .001, respectively.
The moderating effect of male/female on the
relationship between attitude and intention to
reduce plastic bags for female groups is
statistically significant at 0.001 level, whereas
the moderating effect of the male group is
statistically insignificant at any level.
Therefore, the result from Table 4 supported
H3A, which implies that attitude has a stronger
impact to intention to reduce plastic bags for
female than male group.
For hypothesis H3B, the parameter estimates in
the male group (b = .929, t-value = 4.261) is
statistically significant compared to the female
group (b = .242, t-value = 5.181). Both groups
have the positive relationship between
subjective norm and intention to reduce plastic
bags at the statistically significant at 0.001
level; however, the magnitude of the positive
relationship on the male group is higher than on
the female group. Hence, this hypothesis is
partially supported.
6142
Male Female
Unstand.
t-value Unstand.Est. t-value
Est.
.113 1.629 .167 3.519***
.929 4.261*** .242 5.181***
-.298 -1.718* .118 2.118*
3.240 2.482** .670 7.347***
-3.170 -1.952* .305 2.160*
The relationship between perceived behavioral
control and intention to reduce plastic bags on
the female group is positive at statistically
significant of 0.05 level; however, the
relationship between perceived behavioral
control and intention to reduce plastic bags on
the male group is negative at statistically
significant of 0.05 level. Men are more
independent and achievement oriented, which
led to unique and individual traits. During the
COVID-19 pandemic, government campaign
on refraining single-use plastic bags is quite
difficult to perform such as cloth bags on
shopping, facemask, and food delivery service.
Hence, male perception to perform on the
reduction of single-use plastic bags impact
behavioral intention was the opposite direction.
This finding is consistent with Homonoff
(2013) that men are less likely to support the
reusable bags campaign. The result is supported
hypothesis H3C.
The finding on Table 5 indicates that there is a
positive relationship between perceived
behavioral control and behavior to reduce
plastic bags in the male and female groups at
statistically significant of 0.01 and 0.001 levels,
respectively. However, the magnitude of
parameter estimates in the male is higher than
in the female group. Hence, hypothesis 3D is
partially supported.
6143
The relationship between intention and
behavior to reduce plastic bags on the female
group is positive at statistically significant of
0.05 level; however, the relationship between
intention and behavior to reduce plastic bags on
the male group is negative at statistically
significant of 0.05 level. The moderating effect
of the female group increases the strength of
the relationship between intention and behavior
to reduce plastic bags (b = .305, t-value =
2.160), whereas the male group is weakened
the relationship between intention and behavior
to reduce the plastic bags (b = -31.70, t-value =
-1.952), which the result supported H3E.
Summary and Discussion
The structural equation model of actual
behavior to reduce single-use plastic bags is
consistent with the criteria of empirical data. It
also confirms the theory of planned behavior
(Ajzen, 1985) and is suitable for representing
consumer behavior or environmental concerns
and green products along with reducing single-
use plastic bags in Thailand. The findings also
support the notion that perceived behavior
control is the most predictor variable on
intention, followed by attitude and subjective
norms, which is consistent with the previous
studies. Subjective norms have the least direct
impact on intention. The reason seems to be
that many Thai people are aware of plastic
waste problems and public and private sectors
have started to launch several campaigns to
reduce the use of plastic bags. Hence, they have
become aware of this problem by themselves
and did not depend on explanations from
others. In addition, the majority of the
respondents are teenagers, which is GEN Z.
They are a generation that is heavily involved
with social media and online search. Hence,
they can provide and exchange information
with each other to enhance awareness of
environmental concerns.
The findings confirm the moderating effects of
gender on TPB relationships. Attitudes and
perceived behavioral control have more impact
to intention along with intention have stronger
impact to behavior to reduce plastic bags on the
female group. This result is consistent with
several studies that women are more aware and
willing to participate on ethical values and
behavior (Beardsworth et al., 2002; Shin et al.,
Journal of Positive School Psychology
2020). Surprisingly, this study finds that
subjective norms have a stronger impact to
intention to reduce plastic bags on the male
group, which implies that their motivation and
values relied on others’expectations. This
finding is different from various studies (such
as Langford and Mackinon, 2000; Allen and
Rush, 2001; Farrell and Finkelstein, 2007) that
female are more emotional needs of others and
relationship-oriented. Male are more self-
oriented, unique and individual traits. The
reason of this finding is that the government
campaign to reduce single-use plastic bags was
consistent with Covid-19 pandemic situation in
Thailand. People were adjusted themselves to
the new normal situation. Food delivery
became popular in the new normal situation.
The majority of male do not prepare their own
food during the work from home period and
they order the food delivery, which is more
convenient for them. Food delivery produced at
least 5 pieces of plastic waste per food order
(packaging and equipment). Male also do not
carry cloth bags during their visiting
convenient stores or the department stores. If
they buy the product, they will request or buy
the plastic bags, especially on the COVID-19
pandemic situation. Hence, the impacts of
perceived behavioral control to intention along
with intention to behavior to reduce plastic
bags are weaken among the male group.
Perceived behavior control is defined as
“people intend to formulate certain behaviors if
they believe that they can achieve them (Ajzen,
1985).” Bangkok, the capital city of Thailand,
provides at least 80 million plastic bags per day
only from convenience stores (Damrongthai,
2019). Because of this problem, the Ministry of
Natural Resources and Environment called a
meeting to discuss with the private sector
(department stores, shopping centers, and
supermarkets) launching a campaign on
reducing the production of plastic bags by
January 1, 2020. This campaign aims to change
the attitude, norms, and increase perceived
behavioral control or building a greater believe
among consumers that they can change their
behavior. The campaigns have quite successful.
The COVID-19 situation, however, has
affected behavior to reduce the use of plastic
bags and led the intention to perform to a lower
direct impact on actual behavior compared to
perceived behavior control. Such findings are
Nak Gulid
different from Muralidharan and Sheehan
(2016), Ari and Yilmaz (2017), and Ertz et al.
(2017). The reason is that the majority of
previous studies considered only intention to
actual behavior. However, these findings
support TPB in that actual behavior does not
only depend on intention but also perceived
behavior control (Ajzen, 1985; Norberg et al.,
2007).
Theoretical Implications
This study employed TPB (Ajzen, 1985) to
measure the intention and behavior to reduce
single-use plastic bags in the Bangkok
Metropolitan area after the government
campaign to ban their use from January 1,
2020. Moreover, this is the first study to
employ TPB to examine behavior to reduce the
plastic bags in Thailand during a government
campaign, though it was employed in several
other countries (Muralidharan and Sheehan,
2016; Ari and Yilmaz, 2017; Thomas et al.,
2019). TPB has also been recommended for
many research efforts in various fields,
especially for green products, environmental
concerns, and sustainability (Basha et al., 2015,
Ertz et al., 2017; Asnawi et al., 2020; Fedi et
al., 2021). The findings strongly support TPB;
however, the most important variable to
determine intention and behavior is perceived
behavior control. In addition, this study
indicates that intention has a less direct impact
on behavior compared to perceived behavior
control, a result which is different from
previous studies (Muralidharan and Sheehan,
2016; Ari and Yilmaz, 2017; and Ertz et al.,
2017). In this finding, female has a stronger
impact on intention and behavior to reduce
single-use plastic bags, which is consistent with
Eagly and Crowley (1986) that women are
more likely to participate on charity or public
service. In contrast, men have a stronger impact
on subjective norms to intention on refraining
single-use plastic bags than female, which
implied that others’ expectation (such as
friends, relatives, neighbors, colleagues) is
more important on men. The data was collected
for this research during the COVID19
pandemic in Thailand, and suggests that TPB
remains valid under such difficult
circumstances.
6144
Managerial Implications
The results of this study indicate that under the
government campaign to ban plastic bags, it is
very important to emphasize on attitude, norms,
and perceived control. The campaign may have
a different focus on these psychological factors
depending on the target gender. Perceived
behavioral control has the strongest impact on
intention and actual behavior on the reduction
of single-use plastic bags. Hence, the
government sector should cooperate with Thai
retailers’ association to provide free cloth bags
to shoppers who bought the products at the
shop in the certain amount to enhance the
campaign or borrow cloth bags at the shop
before shopping, especially for men. The
reason is that men are more money-oriented
and less likely to participate on charity, public
service, or environmental concern. In addition,
the majority of respondents understood only the
impact of global warming and environmental
concerns, but were less aware of hazards like
cancer risk. The Ministry of Natural Resources
and Environment should cooperate with the
Ministry of Education to provide information
on refraining from the use of single-use plastic
bags to schools and universities. They can
begin advertising campaigns by using young
men to persuade Thai citizens to ban plastic
bags via social media such as Facebook,
Twitter, Instagram and local broadcast channels
such as TV3, TV7, etc. Finally, the government
sector should provide information about the
hazards of plastic waste from food delivery
services and face masks, items which caused
tremendous plastic waste during the COVID-19
pandemic period.
Limitations of This Study
This research employs cross-sectional data by
distributing questionnaires. To gain more
information on government campaigns, a
longitudinal approach is suggested. To validate
TPB, future research is important as the data on
this study was compiled during the COVID-19
situation. The validity of this research should
be tested during a normal situation and the
results and impact factors compared in these
two different situations.
6145
References
[1] ________. (1980). Understanding
Attitudes and Predicting Social Behavior.
Englewood Cliffs, N.J.: Prentice-Hall.
[2] ________. (1991). The theory of planned
behavior. Organizational Behavior and
Human Decision Processes, 50(2): 179-
211.
[3] ________. (2000). Attitudes and the
attitude-behavior relation: Reasoned and
automatic processes. European Review of
Social Psychology, 11(1): 1-33.
[4] ________. (2011). The theory of planned
behavior: Reactions and reflections.
Psychology and Health, 26(9): 1113-1127.
[5] Abraham, C., & Sheeran, P. (2003).
Acting on intentions: The role of
anticipated regret. British Journal of
Social Psychology, 42(4): 495–511.
[6] Aftab, N., Shah, S. A. A., Khan, Z. (2021).
The moderating effect of gender on the
relationship between organizational
commitment and organizational
citizenship behavior in Pakistani
University teachers. Cogent Psychology,
7:1860480, 1-13.
[7] Ajzen, I. (1985). From intentions to
actions: A theory of planned behavior. In
J. Kuhl & J. Beckmann (Eds.), Action-
control: From cognition to behavior (pp.
11-39). Heidelberg, Germany: Springer.
[8] Ajzen, I. and Fishbein, M. (1970). The
prediction of behavior from attitudinal and
normative varibles. Journal of
Experimental Social Psychology, 6(4):
466-487.
[9] Allen, T. D. and Rush M. C. (2001). The
influence of rate gender on ratings of
organizational citizenship behavior.
Journal of Applied Social Psychology,
31(12), 2561-2587.
[10] Amjad, N. and Wood, A. M. (2009).
Identifying and changing the normative
beliefs about aggression which lead young
Muslim adults to join extremist anti-
semitic groups in Pakistan. Preventing
Joining Extremist Groups, 35: 514-519.
[11] Anderson, J. C., and Gerbing, D. W.
(1988). Structural equation modeling in
practice: A review and recommend two-
step approach. Psychology Bullentin,
103(3): 411-423.
[12] Ares, G. and Gambaro, A. (2007).
Influence of gender, age and motives
Journal of Positive School Psychology
underlying food choice on perceived
healthiness and willingness to try
functional foods. Appetite, 49(1), 148-158.
[13] Ari, E. and Yilmaz, V. (2017). Consumer
attitudes on the use of plastic and cloth
bags. Environment, Development and
Sustainability, 19(4): 1219-1234.
[14] Armitage, C. J. and Conner, M. T. (2001).
Efficacy of the theory of planned
behaviour: A meta-analytic review. British
Journal of Social Psychology, 40(4): 471-
499.
[15] Arslan, H. O., Cigdemoglu, C, and
Moseley, C. (2012). A three-tier
diagnostic test to assess pre-service
teachers’ misconceptions about global
warming, greenhouse effect, ozone layer
depletion, and acid rain. International
Journal of Science Education, 34(11): 1-
20.
[16] Asnawi, A., Awang, Z., Afthanorhan, A.,
Mohamad, M., and Karim, F. (2020). The
Influence of hospital image and service
quality on patients’ satisfaction and
loyalty. Management Science Letters,
9(6): 911–920.
[17] Bagozzi, R. P. and Yi. Y. (1989). The
degree of intention formation as a
moderator of the attitude-behavioral
relationship. Social Psychology Quarterly,
52.
[18] Bandura, A. (1980). Gauging the
relationship between self-efficacy
judgment and action. Cognitive Therapy
and Research, 4: 263-268.
[19] Basha, M. B., Mason, C., Shamsudin, M.
F., and Iqbal-Hussain, H. (2015).
Consumers attitude towards organic food.
Procedia Economics and Finance, 31: 444-
452.
[20] Beardsworth, A., Bryman, A., Keil, T.,
Goode, J., Haslam, C., and Lancashire, E.
(2002). Women, men, and food: The
significance of gender for nutritional
attitudes and choices. British Food
Journal, 104(7), 470-491.
[21] Chen, J., Lobo, A. and Rajendran, N.
(2014). Drivers of organic food purchase
intentions in mainland China-evaluating
potential customers’ attitudes,
demographics, and segmentation.
International Journal of Consumer Studies,
38(4), 346-356.
[22] Cheung, S. F., Chan, D. K.-S., and Wong,
Z. S.-Y. (1999). Reexamining the theory
Nak Gulid
of planned behavior in understanding
wastepaper recycling. Environment and
Behavior, 31: 587.
[23] Chokdamrongsuk, J. cited in Juthrakul, P.
(2018). Ministry of Public health
Campaigns to Reduce the Use of “Plastic”.
Retrieved November 15, 2021, from
https://www.thaihealth.or.th
[24] Cross, S.E. and Madson, L. (1997).
Models of the self: Self-construals and
gender. Psychological Bulletin, 122(1): 5-
37.
[25] Damrongthai, P. (2019). Pollution Control
Department, Ministry of Natural
Resources and Environment. Retrieved
November 15, 2021, from
https://www.marketingoops.com
[26] David, P., and Thiele, S. R. (2017). Social
marketing theory measurement precision:
A theory of planned behavior illustration.
Journal of Social Marketing, 8(2): 182-
201.
[27] DeHart-Davis, L., Marlowe. J., and
Pandey, S. K. (2006). Gender dimensions
of public service motivation. Public
Administration Review, 66(6), 873-887.
[28] Dikgang, J. and Visser, M. (2012)
Behavioral response to plastic bag
legislation in Botswana. South African
Journal of Economics, Economic Society
of South Africa, 80(1): 123-133.
[29] Eagly, A. and Crowley, M. (1986). Gender
and helping behavior: A meta-analytical
review of the social psychological
literature. Psychological Bulletin, 100,
282-308.
[30] Ertz, M., Lecompte, A., and Durif, F.
(2017). Dual roles of consumers: Towards
an insight into collaborative consumption
motives. International Journal of Market
Research, 59(6): 725-748.
[31] Farrell, S. K. and Finkelstein, L. M.
(2007). Organizational citizenship
behavior and gender: Expectations and
attributions for performance. North
American Journal of Psychology, 9(1), 81-
96.
[32] Fedi, A., Barbera, F. La, Jong, A. De, and
Rollero, C. (2021). Intention to adopt pro-
environmental behaviors among university
students of hard and soft sciences: The
case of drinking by reusable bottles.
International Journal of Sustainability in
Higher Education, 22(4): 766-779.
6146
[33] Fishbein, M. A. and Ajzen, I. (1975).
Belief, attitude, intention and behavior: An
introduction to theory and research.
Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley.
[34] Fornell. C., and Larcker, D. F. (1981).
Evaluating structural equation models with
unobservable variables and measurement
error. Journal of Marketing Research, 18:
39-50.
[35] Gore, J. S. and Cross, S. E. (2006).
Pursuing goals for us: Relationally
autonomous reasons in long-term goal
pursuit. Journal of Personality and Social
Psychology, 90(5), 848-861.
[36] Gore, J. S., Cross, S. E., and Kanagawa, C.
(2009). Acting in our interests: Relational
self-construal and goal motivation across
cultures. Motivation and Emotion, 33(1),
75-87.
[37] Gulid, N. (2007). Customer Loyalty in the
Luxury Hotel Industry: A Cross Cultural
Perspective. Thammasat University,
Bangkok.
[38] Hair, J., Black, W., Babin, B., Anderson,
R., and Tatham, R. (2006). Multivariate
Data Analysis. 6th Edition, Pearson
Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River.
[39] Haj-Salem, N., and Al-Hawari, M. A.
(2021). Predictors of recycling behavior:
The role of self-conscious emotion.
Journal of Social Marketing, 11(3): 204-
223.
[40] Han, H. and Kim, Y. (2010). An
investigation of green hotel customers’
decision formation: Developing an
extended model of the theory of planned
behavior. International Journal of
Hospitality Management, 29(4): 659-668.
[41] Han, H., Hsu, L.-T., and Sheu, C. (2010).
Application of the theory of planned
behavior to green hotel choice: Testing the
effect of environmentally friendly
activities. Tourism Management, 31(3):
325–334.
[42] Hines, J. M., Hungerford, H. R., and
Tomera, A. N. (2010). Analysis and
synthesis of research on responsible
environmental behavior: A Meta-Analysis.
The Journal of Environmental Education,
18(2): 1-8.
[43] Holdershaw, J., and Gendall, P. (2011).
Predicting blood donation behavior:
Further application of the theory of
planned behavior. Journal of Social
Marketing, 1(2): 120-132.
6147
[44] Homonoff, T. A. (2013). Can small
incentives have large effects? The Impact
of Taxes Versus Bonuses on Disposable
Bag Use. Available at:
http://dataspace.princeton.edu/jspui/88435
/dsp014q77fr47j
[45] Hu, L.-T. and Bentler, P. M. (1995).
Evaluating model fit. In R. H. Hoyle (Ed.),
Structural equation modeling: Concepts,
issues, and applications. (pp. 76–99). Sage
Publications, Inc.
[46] Huang, C. F., Shih, Y. F., and Wang, C. C.
(2014). Associations among
environmental beliefs, Environmental
norms, environmental passions and pro-
environmental behaviors in constructions
industry. Journal of Environmental
Protection and Ecology, 15(3): 1337–
1346.
[47] Jayaraman, J., Norrie, J., and Punja, Z.
(2011). Commercial extract from the
brown seaweed Ascophyllum nodosum
reduces fungal diseases in greenhouse
cucumber. Journal of Applied Phycology,
23(3): 353-361.
[48] Knussen, C., Yule, F., MacKenzie, J., and
Wells, M. (2004). An analysis of
intentions to recycle household waste: The
roles of past behavior, perceived habit, and
perceived lack of facilities. Journal of
Environmental Psychology, 24: 237– 246.
[49] Langford, T. and MacKinnon, N. J.
(2000). The affective bases for the
gendering of traits: Comparing the United
States and Canada. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 1(63), 34-48.
[50] Likert, R. (1932). A technique for the
measurement of attitudes. Archives of
Psychology, 22(140): 55.
[51] Liu, J., C. D. Kummerow, and G. S.
Elsaesser, (2017). Identifying and
analyzing uncertainty structures in the
TRMM Microwave Imager precipitation
product. Int. J. Remote Sens., 38(1): 23-
42.
[52] Madson, L., and Trafimow, D. (2001).
Gender comparisons in the private,
collective, and allocentric selves. Journal
of Social Psychology, 141(4): 551-559.
[53] Malhotra, N. K. (2004). Marketing
Research. Prentice Hall: New Jersey.
[54] Mesch, D. J., Brown, M. S., Moore, Z. I.,
and Hayat, A. D. (2011). Gender
differences in charitable giving.
International Journal of Nonprofit and
Journal of Positive School Psychology
Voluntary Sector Marketing, 16(4), 342-
355.
[55] Muralidharan, S. and Sheehan, K. (2016).
“Tax” and “Fee” message frames as
inhibitors of plastic bag usage among
shoppers: A social marketing application
of the theory of planned behavior. Social
Marketing Quarterly, 22(3): 200-217.
[56] Norberg, P. A., Horne, D., and Horne, D.
(2007). The privacy paradox: Personal
information disclosure intentions versus
behaviors. Journal of Consumer Affairs,
41(1): 100-126.
[57] Ohtomo, S. and Ohnuma, S. (2014).
Psychological interventional approach for
reduce resource consumption: Reducing
plastic bag usage at supermarkets.
Resources, Conservation and Recycling,
84: 57–65.
[58] Osterhus, L. T. (1997). Pro-social
consumer influence strategies: When and
how do they work? Journal of Marketing,
59(January), 17-28.
[59] Paswan, A., Guzman, F., and Lewin, J.
(2017). Attitudinal determinants of
environmentally sustainable behavior.
Journal of Consumer Marketing, 34(5):
414-426.
[60] Paul, J., Modi, A., and Patel, J. (2016).
Predicting green product consumption
using theory of planned behavior and
reasoned action. Journal of Retailing and
Consumer Services, 29: 123–134.
[61] Peake, W. O., Cooper, D., Fitzgerald, M.
A., and Muske G. (2017). Family business
participation in Community social
responsibility: The moderating effect of
gender. Journal of Business Ethics, 142:
325-343.
[62] Ping, R. A. (1995). A parsimonious
estimating technique for interaction and
quadratic latent variables. Journal of
Marketing Research, 32, 336-347.
[63] Sharp, K. H., Ritchie, K. B., Schupp, P. J.,
Ritson-Williams, R., and Paul, V. J.
(2010). Bacterial acquisition in juveniles
of several broadcast spawning coral
species. PLOS ONE, 5(5): 1-6.
[64] Shin, Y. H., Jung, S. E., Im, J., and Severt,
K. (2020). Applying an extended theory of
planned behavior to examine state-branded
food product purchase behavior: The
moderating effect of gender. Journal of
Foodservice Business Research, 23(4),
358-375.
Nak Gulid
[65] Sidharth, M. and Kim, S. (2016). The role
of guilt in influencing sustainable pro-
environmental behaviors among shoppers.
Journal of Advertising Research, 58(3):
349-362.
[66] Simachaya, W. (2021). Thailand
Environment Institute. Retrieved
November 15, 2021, from
http://www.tei.or.th
[67] Sudarmadi, S., Suzuki, S., Kawada, T.,
and Herawati, N. (2001). A survey of
perception, knowledge, awareness, and
attitude in regard to environmental
problems in a sample of two different
social groups in Jakarta, Indonesia.
Environment Development and
Sustainability, 3(2): 169-183.
[68] Tano, G. T., Mendez, J. H., and Armas R.
D. (2021). An extended theory of planned
behavior model to predict intention to use
bioplastic. Journal of Social Marketing,
12(1): 5-28.
[69] Thai Retailers Association. (2019). Did
you know? D-Day will not give away
plastic bags from “retail” from Janauary 1,
2020 onwards, how will it help save the
world? Retrieved December 15, 2021,
from https://www.marketingoops.com
[70] Thomas, O. G.; Sautkina, E.; Poortinga,
W.; Wolstenholme, E., and Whitmarsh, L.
(2019). The English plastic bag charge
changed behavior and increased support
for other charges to reduce plastic waste.
Frontiers in Psychology, 10(266): 1-12.
[71] Tonglet, M., Phillips, P. S., and Bates, M.
P. (2004a). Determining the drivers for
householder pro-environmental behaviour:
Waste minimization compared to
recycling. Resource Conservation and
Recycling, 42: 27–48.
[72] Tonglet, M., Phillips, P. S., and Read, A.
D. (2004). Using the theory of planned
behaviour to investigate the determinants
of recycling behaviour: A case study from
Brixworth, UK. Resource, Conservation
and Recycling, 41, 191-204.
[73] Tonglet, M., Phillips, P. S., and Read, A.
D. (2004b). Using the theory of planned
behaviour to investigate the determinants
of recycling behaviour: A case study from
Brixworth, UK. Resource Conservation
and Recycling, 41: 191–214.
[74] Ullah, I., Lin, C. Y., Malik, N. I., Wu, T.
Y., Araban, M., Griffiths, M. D., and
Pakpour, A. H. (2021). Factors affecting
6148
Paksitani young adults’ intentions to
uptake COVID-19 vaccination: An
extension of the theory of planned
behavior. Brain and Behavior by Wiley
Periodicals LLC. Creative Commons
Attribution License.
[75] Upton, J. (2013). China’s Plastic-bag Ban
Turns Five Years old. Retrieved April 4,
2016, from http://grist.org./article/chinas-
plastic-bag-ban-turns-five-years-old
[76] van Horen, F., Pohlmann, C., Koeppen,
K., and Hannover, B. (2008). Importance
of personal goals in people with
independent versus interdependent selves.
Social Psychology, 39, 213-221.
[77] Worldwatch Institute. (2013). China
Reports 66-Percent Drop in Plastic Bag
Use. Retrieved April 11, 2016 from
http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6167
[78] Wright, M. J. and Klyn, B. (1987).
Environmental attitude - behaviour
correlations in 21 countries. Journal of
Empirical Generalisations in Marketing
Science, 3: 42-60.
[79] Wu, H. and Mweemba, L. (2010).
Environmental self-efficacy, attitude and
behavior among small scale farmers in
Zambia. Environment, Development and
Sustainability, 12: 727-744.
[80] Zen, S. I.; Ahamad, R., and Omar, W.
(2013). No plastic bag campaign day in
Malaysia and the policy implication.
Environ Dev Sustain, 15: 1259-1269.